Keir Starmer

[Chairman Meow]

25 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

That’s what I thought about Trump and Johnson. Surely these buffoons could never get close to running a McDonalds, let alone two of the significant world powers. But, ya know, truth is stranger than fiction. People don’t seem to want adults, they want characters. 

I can see people voting for Johnson because they see his schtick as amusing. 

 

Gove is just creepy and weird. He's a very different character with his not quite human, shouldn't be left alone with anyone you care about kind of vibe. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

9 minutes ago, Chairman Meow said:

I can see people voting for Johnson because they see his schtick as amusing. 

 

Gove is just creepy and weird. He's a very different character with his not quite human, shouldn't be left alone with anyone you care about kind of vibe. 

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending the Pob looking weirdo. I’m just saying, I’ve been caught in the trap of thinking ‘they’re unelectable because…’ before, and it stings. May was wildly unpopular, but she was closer to winning a majority than Corbyn was to being able to attempt to form a coalition. Who knows how shit the next lot after Starmer will be. Hopefully much more popular but I doubt it. Hopefully I’m as wrong about that as I was about the Trump/Johnson thing. Incredulity fallacy is a bitch. 

[Gnasher]

Wait till the furlough payments stop landing on the mats.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

3 hours ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Well, not much Corbyn did turned out to be a vote winner. Though I will say I think the last few posts in the thread are a bit silly. A policy initiative (that people have been calling for) dismissed, regardless of content, because another politician in a different country used it. Then an outline dismissed as uninspiring, with no knowledge of content, then compared to the vote winning guru, Corbyn. 
 

#SinkShipLabour

This is incorrect. 

 

3 hours ago, Jairzinho said:

Labour are cooked.

 

This utter fucking nothingness isn't going to be winning back voters. They're transitioning from pitiful to irrelevant. 

This is correct. 

[Strontium]

3 hours ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Well, not much Corbyn did turned out to be a vote winner. Though I will say I think the last few posts in the thread are a bit silly. A policy initiative (that people have been calling for) dismissed, regardless of content, because another politician in a different country used it. Then an outline dismissed as uninspiring, with no knowledge of content, then compared to the vote winning guru, Corbyn. 
 

#SinkShipLabour

 

Bad Tory Queg

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

 People don’t seem to want adults, they want characters. 

And just to add to the fuckedness of our political system, people think they're voting for their favourite character, yet no Prime Minister has ever been elected to that post.

 

The whole rotten mess needs ripping up and replacing with... well, with democracy.  Trouble is that the people with the power to change it are the people who benefit from the current system, so they're changing nothing. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

23 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Wait till the furlough payments stop landing on the mats.

That's the best we can hope for; to starve people into voting Labour. 

 

Whoop-de-fucking-doo!

[Gnasher]

1 minute ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

That's the best we can hope for; to starve people into voting Labour. 

 

Whoop-de-fucking-doo!

Well it has been the biggest bail out since World War 2 so I imagine its had an effect.

[Numero Veinticinco]

24 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

This is incorrect. 

How fucking droll.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

15 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Well it has been the biggest bail out since World War 2 so I imagine its had an effect.

No denying it. I'm just feeling a bit despondent. 

 

Tony Benn used to say you need to keep two flames burning inside you: the flame of anger against injustice and the flame of hope for the future.  My second flame is choking and sputtering these days.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

2 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

How fucking droll.

If I neg that will you set up a bot to choke up this thread too?

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

If I neg that will you set up a bot to choke up this thread too?

That depends, are you going to try to control what I post with negs and then pretend it's because I - a queer person - is offending you with 'homophobic' slurs. If so, then I might. If not, then I won't. This place has become a cesspit of worms who think they're vipers; silly twats suffering from the Dunning–Kruger effect. You're pretending to be a 'grown-up' conducting 'grown-up' discussions but when you look at what you and your 'grown-up' actions have been in this thread you quickly see you stripped down to what you actually are. Instead of trying to bring other threads into this one and replying like a bland automated bot, why not articulate what exactly is 'incorrect' so I can either say 'I think you're wrong because of this...' or 'yes, I see your point'. That's how grown-ups act, not how you've just conducted yourself. What a hypocrite. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Your mum's a hypocrite. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Great stuff. 

[Jennings]

I am going to Google the Dunning–Kruger effect. I am fucking ace at that!!

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Then an outline dismissed as uninspiring, with no knowledge of content, then compared to the vote winning guru, Corbyn. 
 

#SinkShipLabour

This is wrong because it focuses on a daft little joke I made rather than the actual point that vapid managerial-speak is a massive turn-off.  Nobody is going to be inspired to even click through to see what's behind those 6 empty phrases; how the Hell do we get people to get off their arses and vote? 

 

It is also wrong because it's viewing Corbyn's electoral record exclusively through the lens of 2019, ignoring the surprise successes of 2017. If Labour hope to get into power, we need to learn from what works, as well as what doesn't. 

 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

6 minutes ago, Jennings said:

I am going to Google the Dunning–Kruger effect. I am fucking ace at that!!

It must be hard for NV being surrounded by worms afflicted by the Dunnings-Kruger effect, when he himself  (presumably) is too smart to be so afflicted.

[Gnasher]

1 hour ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

No denying it. I'm just feeling a bit despondent. 

 

Tony Benn used to say you need to keep two flames burning inside you: the flame of anger against injustice and the flame of hope for the future.  My second flame is choking and sputtering these days.

Is this the same Tony Benn who ralied all his life against the Thacherite/EU policy of using a constant supply of cheap and available workerforce to increase employers profits or some random fella with the same name down your local Labour/EU meetings?

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

This is wrong because it focuses on a daft little joke I made rather than the actual point that vapid managerial-speak is a massive turn-off.  Nobody is going to be inspired to even click through to see what's behind those 6 empty phrases; how the Hell do we get people to get off their arses and vote? 

 

It is also wrong because it's viewing Corbyn's electoral record exclusively through the lens of 2019, ignoring the surprise successes of 2017. If Labour hope to get into power, we need to learn from what works, as well as what doesn't. 

 

 

I wish I could roll my eyes straight through the screen. 'Wrong'. Okay, let's break what you quoted and called wrong. *sigh*. 

 

I said 'an outline dismissed as uninspiring'. She posted an outline of what this roadmap aims to achieve. You dismissed it as uninspiring. So that's not wrong, that's clearly there. I said 'with no knowledge of content', you did so with no knowledge of the content of the roadmap (which may or may not be uninspiring bullshit) so that's not wrong. I said you 'compared to the vote winning guru, Corbyn' after you compared it to Corbyn.  So that's not wrong. I think you mean 'disagree'. I suspect you think because you said it, it makes it factual. It doesn't. Now that unpleasant grown-up pedantry is out of the way, we can move on.

 

To address The first sentence of the second paragraph. I feel we're getting to the actual issue you have with my post. I'm not viewing Corbyn's electoral record through 2019 - though, the crushing failure of that shouldn't be undermined - as I think 2017 is a crushing failure too. Doing less shit than previously expected and then reverting to as shit as expected or worse isn't evidence of my wrongness (about what, exactly? Where I sarcastically called Corbyn a vote-winning guru? I think I'm on pretty safe ground there to be honest - unless there's a counter argument that he actually *is* a vote-winning guru, and if somebody thinks he is then we can surely have that discussion). So... not 'wrong' so much as, ya know, 'correct'. 

 

Your final sentence in that paragraph is a point of agreement. They should learn from what works and what doesn't. The issue with that seems to be that it will go against what you have previously spoken about being your views. If you want to learn from the last two elections, surely you end up with 'let's not do that again, it didn't fucking work, not even against the worst *period* opposition *period* ever *period*, so it's unlikely to work now'. This doesn't mean that techniques to not do as poorly as predicted shouldn't be used again, but they're not new techniques. They're standard political techniques. It's not some Corbynite masterplan created by him and his team. It certainly doesn't preclude an MP from a tweet which is essentially 'hey, we've got a plan that's going to do these things'. 

 

Look, the point is this; I think people should wait until they see what the roadmap is before dismissing this. Picking up one tweet from one MP and being dismissive is just *sign* fucking nonsense. You talk about 'vapid managerial-speak' being a massive turn off, but that's exactly what the Tories do. It's a bullet point for hard of thinking to easily understand. It's empty bullshit, and it's meant to be. You say 'nobody' will be inspired to click through to see what's behind those empty phrases... but every single opponent of theirs, including you, would immediately click through looking to see where you could get your pound of flesh. I'd look through it. Why, because it would be the thing people on here have been calling for... plans and policies. 

 

This is all so fucking dull. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

27 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Is this the same Tony Benn who ralied all his life against the Thacherite/EU policy of using a constant supply of cheap and available workerforce to increase employers profits or some random fella with the same name down your local Labour/EU meetings?

No. It's the same Tony Benn who opposed the EU because he argued that it restricted a Government's ability to e,g nationalise its industries or devalue its currency. I don't recall him ever arguing for workers to have fewer rights. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

34 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I wish I could roll my eyes straight through the screen. 'Wrong'. Okay, let's break what you quoted and called wrong. *sigh*. 

 

I said 'an outline dismissed as uninspiring'. She posted an outline of what this roadmap aims to achieve. You dismissed it as uninspiring. So that's not wrong, that's clearly there. I said 'with no knowledge of content', you did so with no knowledge of the content of the roadmap (which may or may not be uninspiring bullshit) so that's not wrong. I said you 'compared to the vote winning guru, Corbyn' after you compared it to Corbyn.  So that's not wrong. I think you mean 'disagree'. I suspect you think because you said it, it makes it factual. It doesn't. Now that unpleasant grown-up pedantry is out of the way, we can move on.

 

To address The first sentence of the second paragraph. I feel we're getting to the actual issue you have with my post. I'm not viewing Corbyn's electoral record through 2019 - though, the crushing failure of that shouldn't be undermined - as I think 2017 is a crushing failure too. Doing less shit than previously expected and then reverting to as shit as expected or worse isn't evidence of my wrongness (about what, exactly? Where I sarcastically called Corbyn a vote-winning guru? I think I'm on pretty safe ground there to be honest - unless there's a counter argument that he actually *is* a vote-winning guru, and if somebody thinks he is then we can surely have that discussion). So... not 'wrong' so much as, ya know, 'correct'. 

 

Your final sentence in that paragraph is a point of agreement. They should learn from what works and what doesn't. The issue with that seems to be that it will go against what you have previously spoken about being your views. If you want to learn from the last two elections, surely you end up with 'let's not do that again, it didn't fucking work, not even against the worst *period* opposition *period* ever *period*, so it's unlikely to work now'. This doesn't mean that techniques to not do as poorly as predicted shouldn't be used again, but they're not new techniques. They're standard political techniques. It's not some Corbynite masterplan created by him and his team. It certainly doesn't preclude an MP from a tweet which is essentially 'hey, we've got a plan that's going to do these things'. 

 

Look, the point is this; I think people should wait until they see what the roadmap is before dismissing this. Picking up one tweet from one MP and being dismissive is just *sign* fucking nonsense. You talk about 'vapid managerial-speak' being a massive turn off, but that's exactly what the Tories do. It's a bullet point for hard of thinking to easily understand. It's empty bullshit, and it's meant to be. You say 'nobody' will be inspired to click through to see what's behind those empty phrases... but every single opponent of theirs, including you, would immediately click through looking to see where you could get your pound of flesh. I'd look through it. Why, because it would be the thing people on here have been calling for... plans and policies. 

 

This is all so fucking dull. 

Wow!  I'll agree with the last sentence, at least.

 

You seem to be arguing against some one-eyed Corbyn cultist and "enemy" of the Labour leadership.  I don't know who that is, but it ain't me, Babe.

 

The Tories, cunts that they are, do bullet-points and slogans much better than Labour do. For all I know, the "roadmap" may be stellar; it may be everything I'm crying out for. But you wouldn’t have a clue from the tweet with which Dodds tried to trail it. Obviously, I didn't "dismiss" any of the policies or the roadmap or anything like that, because... how could I? I've no idea what they are and the empty words on that bullet list don't give any clues.

 

Did you find that tweet inspiring? Was there anything in it that made you think "sounds good; tell me more"  Or was it just vacuous pap delivered in the kind of language that is only used by people who think "workshop" is a verb?  Five points were instantly forgettable and the sixth is laughable.

 

We're obviously not going to agree on the lessons to be learned from 2017. Some people might take a binary view of "we didn't win therefore we were shite". Others might take a more nuanced view of "we did much better than expected, let's find out how that happened".

 

[Gnasher]

43 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

No. It's the same Tony Benn who opposed the EU because he argued that it restricted a Government's ability to e,g nationalise its industries or devalue its currency. I don't recall him ever arguing for workers to have fewer rights. 

You got the e,g part right. Every major socialist this country has produced has been against the EU and its economic policy of stack em high sell em cheap.

[Numero Veinticinco]

15 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Wow!  I'll agree with the last sentence, at least.

 

You seem to be arguing against some one-eyed Corbyn cultist and "enemy" of the Labour leadership.  I don't know who that is, but it ain't me, Babe.

 

The Tories, cunts that they are, do bullet-points and slogans much better than Labour do. For all I know, the "roadmap" may be stellar; it may be everything I'm crying out for. But you wouldn’t have a clue from the tweet with which Dodds tried to trail it. Obviously, I didn't "dismiss" any of the policies or the roadmap or anything like that, because... how could I? I've no idea what they are and the empty words on that bullet list don't give any clues.

 

Did you find that tweet inspiring? Was there anything in it that made you think "sounds good; tell me more"  Or was it just vacuous pap delivered in the kind of language that is only used by people who think "workshop" is a verb?  Five points were instantly forgettable and the sixth is laughable.

 

We're obviously not going to agree on the lessons to be learned from 2017. Some people might take a binary view of "we didn't win therefore we were shite". Others might take a more nuanced view of "we did much better than expected, let's find out how that happened".

 

We know how it happened. We know it didn't work in 2019. We know this things aren't applicable at all times for all leaders. If it was, it would be 'whoever followed the steps of 'how to win an election' most closely'. Political Science and electoral maths weren't invented in 2017, babe. As is clear from the post, I'm not taking the binary view - I said there are things done in 2017 but that they're not new and they're already known. Therefore, it's not so much about learning lessons as implementing the correct tactical approach to winning an election for the time. There's not much to learn about winning an election next time from 2017 that wasn't already known well before 2017. If there is, what is it?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

31 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

You got the e,g part right. Every major socialist this country has produced has been against the EU and its economic policy of stack em high sell em cheap.

Not "every major Socialist". There are plenty of Socialists who recognise the benefits of Internationalism and greater rights for workers & consumers and environmental protection, but... you know what? Someone ought to start a thread about this.

[Chairman Meow]

3 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

No denying it. I'm just feeling a bit despondent. 

 

Tony Benn used to say you need to keep two flames burning inside you: the flame of anger against injustice and the flame of hope for the future.  My second flame is choking and sputtering these days.

 

Using that analogy my second flame went out a few years ago.

 

I reckon humanity is fucked, I'd like to be wrong, but sadly I don't think I am.